California can clean up the air by cleaning up the law
Senator Jenny Oropeza
May 26, 2006
Have you ever had to hold your breath while walking out of a building because of a cloud of cigarette smoke, even if the source was the required distance of 20 feet? Did you come away with your clothes and hair smelling of cigarettes and the knowledge that, if you smelled like smoke, surely your lungs were exposed as well?
The debate between the personal freedoms of the smoker and non-smoker has raised these and other questions as we continue to define this important public policy.
When California banned smoking in the workplace and, most notability, at restaurants and bars, the idea was to ensure that people were not forced to be exposed to a harmful environment.
Among the most important obligations of government is to protect its residents. How broad and how far that protection extends is at the center of many policy debates we have in America .
This responsibility can speak to a range of issues: Having an adequate police force; protecting our environment with strong coastal policies; and enhancing our transportation system to lessen congestion on our highways and cut down on motor vehicle exhaust.
When California lawmakers passed landmark legislation in 1994 to restrict smoking at places of employment, this concept of protecting a quality of life was at the center of the discussion.
More than a decade after our Golden State set the standard for smoking regulations, California , to its credit, continues to keep this issue at the forefront of public consciousness.
Earlier this year, the city of Calabasas enacted perhaps the strongest local ordinance on smoking in the country. The California Legislature has held policy hearings focusing on the subject. Hollywood has even released a mock-umentary now in theaters titled: ?Thank You For Smoking.? Few, except perhaps the tobacco companies, would disagree that it is good news that a study released just last week showed fewer Californians are smoking.
We all know that, barring a few limited exceptions, one cannot smoke inside a place of employment. But where does the ?inside? end and the ?outside? begin?
State law says there shall be no smoking in an enclosed space. But statutes fail to define an enclosed space. Some question whether a stairway or elevator should be restricted because they are not always entirely enclosed. Should a lobby or waiting area be considered part of the ?place of employment??
With an eye toward clarification, I introduced Assembly Bill 2067, which last week passed the second of two key policy committees. It will be heard in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations sometime in the next 30 days. The bill would then go to the full Assembly Floor for a vote.
If approved, my bill would add common-use areas to the definition of enclosed spaces where smoking is already prohibited. A common-use area would include: lobbies, lounges, waiting areas, stairwells, restrooms and elevators. This legislation has gained the support of the American Lung Association and the American Heart Association as well as the Foundation for a Smoke-Free America.
AB 2067 is a plan not just to improve public health but also to reinforce simple common courtesy. I ask you to join me in supporting this much-needed effort to protect California ?s quality of life ? for everyone. It is my hope that by closing these loopholes and cleaning up the law, we can clean up the air.
The debate between the personal freedoms of the smoker and non-smoker has raised these and other questions as we continue to define this important public policy.
When California banned smoking in the workplace and, most notability, at restaurants and bars, the idea was to ensure that people were not forced to be exposed to a harmful environment.
Among the most important obligations of government is to protect its residents. How broad and how far that protection extends is at the center of many policy debates we have in America .
This responsibility can speak to a range of issues: Having an adequate police force; protecting our environment with strong coastal policies; and enhancing our transportation system to lessen congestion on our highways and cut down on motor vehicle exhaust.
When California lawmakers passed landmark legislation in 1994 to restrict smoking at places of employment, this concept of protecting a quality of life was at the center of the discussion.
More than a decade after our Golden State set the standard for smoking regulations, California , to its credit, continues to keep this issue at the forefront of public consciousness.
Earlier this year, the city of Calabasas enacted perhaps the strongest local ordinance on smoking in the country. The California Legislature has held policy hearings focusing on the subject. Hollywood has even released a mock-umentary now in theaters titled: ?Thank You For Smoking.? Few, except perhaps the tobacco companies, would disagree that it is good news that a study released just last week showed fewer Californians are smoking.
We all know that, barring a few limited exceptions, one cannot smoke inside a place of employment. But where does the ?inside? end and the ?outside? begin?
State law says there shall be no smoking in an enclosed space. But statutes fail to define an enclosed space. Some question whether a stairway or elevator should be restricted because they are not always entirely enclosed. Should a lobby or waiting area be considered part of the ?place of employment??
With an eye toward clarification, I introduced Assembly Bill 2067, which last week passed the second of two key policy committees. It will be heard in the Assembly Committee on Appropriations sometime in the next 30 days. The bill would then go to the full Assembly Floor for a vote.
If approved, my bill would add common-use areas to the definition of enclosed spaces where smoking is already prohibited. A common-use area would include: lobbies, lounges, waiting areas, stairwells, restrooms and elevators. This legislation has gained the support of the American Lung Association and the American Heart Association as well as the Foundation for a Smoke-Free America.
AB 2067 is a plan not just to improve public health but also to reinforce simple common courtesy. I ask you to join me in supporting this much-needed effort to protect California ?s quality of life ? for everyone. It is my hope that by closing these loopholes and cleaning up the law, we can clean up the air.
Print
Email
